The most stupid or greedy Public Servant was the former ED of Uganda Forestry Authority whose wife stole 900 Million in cash in 2009.

Okay, it seems I was not the only one who initially misunderstood the story about Mr. Bagada. I see @TonyNatif, @bartlettdaron and @JackieAkampwera made the same mistake. But even after reading the story carefully, serious questions remain. How does someone lose UGX 129 million through mobile banking in a single night? Mobile money and mobile banking systems are not limitless. Accounts are linked to specific phone numbers, transactions are logged, and withdrawal and transfer limits exist. The circumstances as presented simply raise more questions than they answer. What is equally striking is the reported account balance. If UGX 129 million was allegedly taken and UGX 570 million remained in the account, then we are talking about an account that reportedly held close to UGX 700 million. I have no idea what Mr. Bagada's legitimate sources of income are, and that is precisely why an objective analysis is necessary. If he has spent his career in @ODPPUGANDA since he left school, then the question is what are the income streams that accumulated such wealth? If every shilling is legitimate, there should be a clear and verifiable explanation. One of the reasons I have consistently maintained that no one in Public Service is clean (and I include myself here) is that their wealth is disconnected from their known earnings. Civil servants are not paid salaries that would ordinarily enable them to accumulate vast fortunes, construct expensive properties, or build large investment portfolios without substantial additional income. Unless there is an inheritance. We cannot even secure substantial salary loans to invest in lucrative business ventures. If someone has legitimately grown modest savings and loans into a thriving business empire, they must have brilliant business brains. But extraordinary wealth demands extraordinary transparency. If the story is accurate, then @IGGUganda or @CID1_UG should not focus solely on the alleged theft. It should also examine the source of the funds, the movement of the funds, and whether the accumulation of such cash is consistent with declared income. The sensational story of a sauna and a woman stealing from him should not divert attention from the cash on his account.